Linux-Advocacy Digest #168, Volume #29 Mon, 18 Sep 00 01:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451800 (Marty)
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ("JS/PL")
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) (Jack Troughton)
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools (Jack Troughton)
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools (Jack Troughton)
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ("JS/PL")
Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT (Chad Irby)
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools (Bob Germer)
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools (Bob Germer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451800
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 04:11:38 GMT
Dave "Fozzy" Tholen wrote:
>
> Marty writes:
>
> > Dave "Fozzy" Tholen wrote:
>
> Where did that come from, Marty?
The previous attribution in this thread.
> >> Marty writes:
>
> >>> Dave "Fozzy" Tholen wrote:
>
> >> Where did that come from, Marty?
>
> > The previous attribution in this thread.
>
> You didn't explain where that previous attribution came from, Marty.
You never asked.
> > I was just being consistent.
>
> You were just being evasive, Marty.
Did you expect me to read your mind?
> >>>> Marty writes:
>
> >>>>>>> Dave "Fozzy" Tholen wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Where did that come from, Marty?
>
> >>>>> The previous attribution in this thread.
>
> >>>> You didn't explain whee that one came from, Marty.
>
> >>> Of what relevance is "whee" that one came from?
>
> >> Typical evasion.
>
> > On your part.
>
> Incorrect, Marty.
Classic pontification.
> > I cannot address your inquiry until you clear up what it was
> > that you meant.
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I wasn't clear, Marty,
> using it as an excuse to continue your evasiveness.
I see you're expecting me to read your mind again. Why not just correct your
error and remove the ambiguity? How ironic, coming from someone complaining
about alleged "evasiveness".
> >>>>> I was just being consistent.
>
> >>>> Consistent with the lack of an explanation, Marty.
>
> >>> Still having reading comprehension problems, I see.
>
> >> You see incorrectly again, Marty.
>
> > You're erroneously presupposing that I was seeing incorrectly before.
>
> Incorrect, Marty, given that I identified your consistent lack of an
> explanation.
That doesn't say anything good about your reading comprehension.
> >>>>>>>> Marty writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>> Dave "Fozzy" Tholen wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> Where did that come from, Marty?
>
> >>>>>>> Your lack of culture never ceases to astound.
>
> >>>>>> I see that you didn't answer my question.
>
> >>>>> Incorrect.
>
> >>>> Tyopical pontification.
>
> >>> What is allegedly "tyopical" about it?
>
> >> Typical evasion.
>
> > On your part.
>
> Incorrect, Marty.
Classic pontification.
> > I see you failed to answer the question again.
>
> How ironic.
How can I answer a question containing a made-up word?
> >>>>>> No surprise there.
>
> >>>>> No surprise that you would ignore the answer I presented.
>
> >>>> What alleged answer, Marty?
>
> >>> See above.
>
> >> Where is the alleged answer above, Marty?
>
> > Haven't you been paying attention?
>
> Yes, which is why I know there isn't an answer above, Marty.
Obviously not, considering the answer above.
> >>>>>>>>>> Marty writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jim "our-very-own-twice-elected-KOTM" Stuyck writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Why not pick a more unique name, like "Fozzy" or "Kermit"?
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Stuyck wanted to be addressed by his title, Marty. I'm simply
> >>>>>>>>>> following his lead, and he hasn't used either of those.
>
> >>>>>>>>> I'd like to be addressed by you as "Fozzy".
>
> >>>>>>>> Why?
>
> >>>>>>> Because that is what I would like.
>
> >>>>>> Why?
>
> >>>>> Because I would like that.
>
> >>>> Why?
>
> >>> Because I would find that to my pleasing.
>
> >> Why?
>
> > Because it would be something that I would appreciate.
>
> Why?
Because I would find it enjoyable.
> >>>>>>>>> Are you now going to follow my lead?
>
> >>>>>>>> Perhaps.
>
> >>>>>>> Aren't you sure?
>
> >>>>>> I have no idea what your "lead" truly is,
>
> >>>>> Not surprising.
>
> >>>> Because of your inconsistency, Marty.
>
> >>> What alleged "inconsistency"?
>
> >> The inconsistency of your "leads", Marty.
>
> > You're erroneously presupposing inconsistency of my "leads", Dave.
>
> Incorrect, Marty.
Even more classic pontification.
> >>> I see you failed to note my consistent use of
> >>> the attribution in this thread.
>
> >> The key words here are "in this thread". It's the other threads
> >> that demonstrate your inconsistency, Marty.
>
> > I see you are having trouble sticking to this thread for your argument.
> > No surprise there.
>
> I see that you are not looking at other threads to avoid admitting to
> inconsistency. No surprise there.
I see that you are still having trouble sticking to this thread for your
argument. No surprise there.
> >>>>>> Marty, given that you are so inconsistent.
>
> >>>>> Incorrect, given that I've used the attribution consistently in
> >>>>> this thread.
>
> >>>> What do you consider "this thread" to be, Marty?
>
> >>> The postings in which I have used the attribution "Dave 'Fozzy'
> >>> Tholen" and your responses to such postings.
>
> >> Classic illogical circular reasoning.
>
> > Not at all. The above specified precisely and exactly what I consider
> > "this thread".
>
> Considering "this thread" to be "this thread" is classic illogical
> circular reasoning, Marty.
That depends on your definition of the first "this thread".
> > It can be narrowed down to a finite number of postings which were
> > precisely the ones to which I was referring.
>
> All threads have a finite number of postings, Marty, but they don't all
> have the same subject line.
Of what relevance is this remark?
> > There's nothing illogical about being self-referential when we are
> > still contributing to what I consider "this thread".
>
> There is something illogical about using circular reasoning, Marty.
Glad I haven't done such a thing.
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 00:19:44 -0400
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Uqgx5.9330$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Global warming is the biggest pile of crap any human has come up with yet
(well,
> next to OS/2 <g>)
>
> Hear me out on this one:
>
> The Earth is a system of balances. If one thing gets out of whack,
> 10 other things compensate to restore the balance.
You could be correct.
As far as fearing global warming, let it warm up...see if I care.
Ice Age? - Whatever, I prefer things a little chilly.
At any rate none of it will "suddenly" happen, and when it does I won't be
around to see it.
I'd be more concerned with the sudden discovery of a 50 mile wide meteor,
traveling at 60 miles per second towards my roof.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jack Troughton)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 04:14:46 GMT
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 03:23:44, "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I can't say why someone would need to buy a CO2 generator though, It
>doesn't seem cost effective for growing food. :-))
On the other hand, most of the dope growers I know think they're great
;)
--
==========================================================
* Jack Troughton jake at jakesplace.dhs.org *
* http://jakesplace.dhs.org ftp://jakesplace.dhs.org *
* Montréal PQ Canada news://jakesplace.dhs.org *
==========================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jack Troughton)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 04:11:45 GMT
On Sun, 17 Sep 2000 18:27:08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Sat, 16 Sep 2000 02:18:48 GMT, Jack Troughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>On Fri, 15 Sep 2000 21:34:50, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 15 Sep 2000 21:15:59 +0100, Sam Morris
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>> > > > >I wonder how the eco-paranoids can explain the ice ages and
>>>>tropical
>>>>> > > > >fossils well north of 40 degrees North latitude which occurred many
>>>>> > > > >millions of years before the rise of man.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > > Plate Tectonics. Look it up.
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > I know that. I was wondering how the eco-nuts would explain it since
>>>>they
>>>>> > > claim that man is responsible for climatic changes, etc. --
>>>>> >
>>>>> > They are not exclusive. Just because there are non-human processes
>>>>> > that lead to climatic changes, doesn't necessarily mean that human
>>>>> > processes can't also lead to climatic change.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > The big problem with human-induced climatic change is the time scale
>>>>> > involved. If human processes accelerate climatic change, causing a
>>>>> > change that would normally take hundreds or thousands of years to
>>>>> > occur happen in years or decades, the amount of time available to
>>>>> > adjust and survive becomes reduced, making it harder for us to adapt
>>>>> > to it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Name one. Please provide concree, unassailable evidence that
>>>>> can prove (beyond any doubt or controversy) that without human
>>>>> activity, the climatic change would have happened more slowly.
>>>>>
>>>>> Name ..just...one.
>>>>
>>>>My god, that sounds just like something Edwin would have said.
>>>
>>> Considering that there is no faith amongst society in general
>>> that the weather can be predicted, how can we take seriously
>>> any claims regarding after the fact analysis of why a particular
>>> weather event has occured?
>>
>>Weather cannot be predicted. I can say that it's going to rain
>>tomorrow, but I can't say if it will rain in three days.
>>
>>OTOH, I can say that it's going to be damned cold come February in
>>Montreal. That's a prediction, and I'm >99.999% likely to be right. I
>>can even say why it will occur; precession of the earth as it orbits
>>the sun.
>
> "damned cold" isn't nearly well enough specified.
Ok, how about this. I can say that the average day time temperature
will be between ten and fifteen degrees below zero, and the average
night time temperature will be between twenty and thirty degrees below
zero. We will have an app. 70% chance of at least one day where the
temperature will be above zero, and an app. 70% chance that at least
one night will be colder than forty degrees below zero.
All numbers in celsius.
Along the way, we will probably also have at least one and possibly as
many as three major winter storms. It will be warmer than average
during those storms. However, most days will be very sunny, but very
cold.
Can I tell you which days will be sunny and cold and which days will
be cloudy, snowy, and warm? No. Can I say it is almost certainly going
to play out that way over the course of the month? Yes.
It's sort of like the uncertainty principle; the smaller you make the
box you are examining the subatomic particle in, the more you know
about the position and the less you know about the velocity. I can
look ahead to a time period of a month and feel quite confident about
the predictions I will make about weather events within that month. If
I try to shrink the box to a day, it is very difficult... unless the
day in question is tomorrow, of course. I can be very accurate about
tomorrow the evening before just by looking at the sky. I can be
accurate about a month a year or more ahead of time. One can be
accurate about years years in advance.
Finally, there's the question that Aaron raised about being afraid of
change. Well, here's the problem. If there is widespread warming of
the earth, some places will win and some will lose. That is an easy
prediction to make. It is entirely possible that the vast frozen
wastes of Canada's far north will become far more viable than they are
now. OTOH, they are frozen deserts now; the only reason why there is a
lot of water there is because a lot of it never melts; most of the far
north is permafrost; the land never thaws completely. What happens if
instead of being a cold desert (ie- little precipitation) it becomes a
warm one (ie- little precipitation and the several hundred thousand
years of accumulated water evaporate). Then, it's not such a winning
situation after all.
There's one other aspect of global warming that's not very well
understood, I think. Most people think that global warming means that
temperatures will rise a bit. However, that's not necessarily true.
What it really means is that there's more energy in the atmosphere.
However, there's more than one way for that energy to manifest itself;
warmer temperatures are but one way that energy may make itself felt.
More powerful storms and more unpredictable weather are others. I'm
sure that the folks in tornado alley wouldn't like to see a general
rise in the number of and strength of tornadoes. Also, I bet that
people in Florida and the Carolinas wouldn't like to see an increase
in the numbers and strength of hurricanes either. Hurricanes and
tornadoes are manifestations of energy in the atmosphere, after all,
and it is just as reasonable to suspect that more energy in the
atmosphere could manifest itself in that manner as well as in warmer
temperatures.
Another issue that might have some interesting affects would be a rise
in temperature in the world's oceans. This has the potential to be
devestating to fisheries, which are a major source of food for the
world. Also, there's the possibility that thermal expansion of the
water in the oceans coupled with the addition of all that water
currently locked up in the Antarctic ice cap could affect coastal
areas very badly.
Change can be good; it can also be bad.
Anyway, it's late; time for bed. Nice sig, by the way; that was very
funny. Who was Father Damian C. Fandal?
--
==========================================================
* Jack Troughton jake at jakesplace.dhs.org *
* http://jakesplace.dhs.org ftp://jakesplace.dhs.org *
* Montréal PQ Canada news://jakesplace.dhs.org *
==========================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jack Troughton)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 04:19:21 GMT
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 01:35:19, "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Jason Bowen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8q3lun$2un$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >"Jason Bowen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>> >> You're analogy was very poor. There is proof that CFC's are
>by-products
>> >> of certain aerosols, simple chemistry shows that. CFS's also destroy
>O3,
>> >> plenty of proof for that.
>> >
>> >How long does it take for the cfc's to even reach the ozone? I've heard
>as
>> >high as 50 years. In which case you might as well consider it destroyed
>no
>> >matter what fix gets implemented now.
>>
>> whoa, wait a minute, you mean you have read on this and don't just spout
>> your belief system?!?! ;-). There are a couple of naturally occuring
>> sources of Chlorine based gases, CH3Cl and HCL. Marine plankton produces
>> a lot but only accounts for 0.6ppb and the current stratospheric
>> concentration is 3.3ppb so obviously there is another source. Volcanoes
>> provide a lot of HCL but most of this is scrubbed from the air by the
>> rain, hence the reason why even major eruptions only affect climate for 1
>> to 2 years and that is from ash and Sulfur based emissions. Little HCL
>> from eruptions makes it to the stratosphere. So most of the CFC's are
>> anthropogenic with lifespans of 60-120 years. The levels have been steady
>> though since Freon-11 and Freon-12, both CFC's, have been banned. Now
>> only if we could take the extra ozone that makes the city air so damn
>> dirty and ship it to Anartica, then we'd have a solution to 2 problems.
>
>I haven't read about it much. But one little tidbit I found rediculous was
>the billion or so the US government paid to convert the refrigeration
>systems in our nuclear missiles over to ozone friendly refrigerant. I'd hate
>to see the non ozone friendly chemicals released into the atmosphere when
>the missile explodes
Ah, but there's one problem with that. How often do you have to refill
the air conditioner in your car? To be sure, I don't doubt that the
sealing job on the nukes is better than the sealing job on the air
conditioning in your car, but there is no such thing as a perfectly
closed system. The nukes don't have to go off for the refrigerant in
them to get into the atmosphere; they do so every day, a few molecules
at a time. Hell, considering the age of some of the weapons, it's
entirely possible that the sealing job on the air conditioning in a
new car is better than the one on a lot of the nuclear weapons out
there.
--
==========================================================
* Jack Troughton jake at jakesplace.dhs.org *
* http://jakesplace.dhs.org ftp://jakesplace.dhs.org *
* Montréal PQ Canada news://jakesplace.dhs.org *
==========================================================
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 00:38:15 -0400
"Jack Troughton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED].
ca...
> On Mon, 18 Sep 2000 03:23:44, "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I can't say why someone would need to buy a CO2 generator though, It
> >doesn't seem cost effective for growing food. :-))
>
> On the other hand, most of the dope growers I know think they're great
> ;)
They still have those? Man I'm out of the loop! What's it going for per lid
these days?
------------------------------
From: Chad Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 04:43:35 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Chad Irby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > But he also said "-- same kernel, same overall features" which is
> > > incorrect.
> >
> > So tell us.. what differences are there between the NT 5 kernel and the
> > Windows 2000 kernel?
List of Windows 2000 (aka Windows 5) features and improvements over
Windows NT 4 deleted...
> > Keep in mind that they're the same product, with different names.
>
> Obviously you had no idea what the hell you're talking about, so why
> do I even bother trying to educate you?
So far, you've told us that NT 5, which was released as Windows 2000,
has many features that Windows NT *4* didn't have (noe that 4 and 5 are
different numbers). When are you going to address the fact that
"Windows 2000" and "Windows NT 5" are the exact same product in a
different box?
IT"S THE SAME GODDAMNED PRODUCT! All they did was change the name
before they released it.
Please note that Windows NT 4, which was released, was a *different*
product than NT 5, which was released under the name Windows 2000 so
Microsoft could have a cool-sounding product name.
--
Chad Irby \ My greatest fear: that future generations will,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 04:56:18 GMT
On 09/18/2000 at 01:48 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) said:
> I have proof for the levels of CFC's leveling off, any study on cfc's
> proves it and lo and behold it coincides with the banning of the said
> products.
You are a liar. You have some measurements which MAY POSSIBLY indicate
that. However, only several centuriy's worth of measurement can prove it.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 14
MR/2 Ice 2.20 Registration Number 67
Finishing in 2nd place makes you first loser
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2000 05:03:03 GMT
On 09/17/2000 at 11:05 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) said:
> >No one has provided any irrefutable scientific proof which is universally
> >accepted that CFC's have cause any climatic changes. There are theories
> >put forth by some scientists which are not accepted by others with equal
> >prominence.
> Which is why things are called theories and studied. Dismissing
> something because there is a disagreement is the sign of stupidity.
Taking radical action based on an unproven and disputed theory is totally
wrong. To ban a whole family of products because some whacko
pseudoscientists like you think it might cause harm is foolhardy at best.
> >
> >You on the other hand are too stupid to recognize valid analogy when you
> >read it. Sad, sad, sad. About what one expects from liberals like you.
> You're analogy was very poor. There is proof that CFC's are by-products
> of certain aerosols, simple chemistry shows that. CFS's also destroy
> O3, plenty of proof for that.
There you go again. Stating as fact disputed theory. You are the type of
asshole who persecuted Copernicus because he said the earth and planets
revolved around the sun.
> I don't know about Joe, but I am no
> liberal, pretty conservative actually. I just am not facist and know
> not to dismiss something that might hurt one of my beliefs.
You are indeed a facist of the worst order. You would impose your beliefs
based on controversial theory on all the world. That, sir is facism.
> You are too
> small of a person to do such a thing and are more of a facist than a
> conservative.
No, sir, I am a conservative who believes firmly that he who governs least
governs best. I also believe that government should stay the hell out of
citizens' lives, livelihood, and pocket.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 14
MR/2 Ice 2.20 Registration Number 67
Finishing in 2nd place makes you first loser
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
